Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > 9/11
Register FAQ Chat Social Groups Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 25-04-2012, 01:00 PM   #1
dimaryp
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 39
Default my conclusion on 9/11

Im not really one for conspiracy theories and more often than not I think the official version of events is the truth. However I do have concerns about events like Diana, Maddy Mccann and 9/11.

Ive had doubts in my mind about 9/11 for some time now but I have only fairly recently undertaken any research in relation to what could have happened that day. Below is a brief summary of what I think happened. Please feel free to agree or disagree with any of it so that I can consider the arguments and take it on board. I am not a person who will blindly continue to believe a conspiracy if there is evidence to the contrary but 9/11 for me just does not add up on so many levels.

The first most glaring thing that strikes me and has for some time is how fake the planes hitting the towers look. It is laughable how bad it is. The footage of flight 175 entering the south tower just looks so wrong it really disturbs me. The plane just glides in like a knife through butter. No breaking up of the plane, no crushing, no explosion on impact, just a clean, smooth passage into the tower. Im pretty much convinced that the footage of the planes hitting the towers is either faked CGI footage or the footage is genuine and is of something which was actually there but was not a plane.

So now im thinking if it wasnít planes that hit the buildings what was it? To me it looks like missiles were likely to have been fired into the towers from a helicopter. I suppose this then puts me in the Ďno planersí category. As crazy as it sounds thatís the conclusion that ive come to along with quite a few others it seems. The evidence has pointed me there. I didnít want it to but it has and I see that as a credible explanation.

Also I cant believe that three aircraft of that size could be flown perfectly into collision with the towers and the pentagon. We are meant to believe that amateur pilots with only minimal experience of flying light aircraft could have controlled the planes for some considerable distance at high speed and perfectly guided the planes slap bang into the buildings. Im sorry but that is just fairy tale stuff. Never in a million years would that happen. The hijackers would have been lucky to get within a mile of the targets nevermind hitting such small targets bang on. Just think about that, if you personally had had minimal flight training on light aircraft would you have been able to take control of one of those planes mid flight, which they had no experience of flying and guided them perfectly into the towers and the pentagon with no parts of the plane sticking out. I think its actually unbelievable that those version of events could ever happen. Shanksville is just a red herring to make it look like the pilots werenít that perfect and give the illusion some balance.

So if I believe missiles were fired into the towers then the footage must have been faked and CGI used to cover up the missile strikes and the media is in on the plan or some kind of hologram has been used to cover the missiles as I believe David Shayler has commented. I donít go along with the hologram theory. I suppose anything is possible but I just cant see that.

So im going with the faked media footage using CGI theory. I think the shape of a plane has been superimposed over the top of the missiles. In terms of what happened at the pentagon I believe that a missile was used again and that is what you can see very briefly on the CCTV hitting the building.

The towers had to be brought down to cover up the lack of evidence of planes being used. To leave them standing would have meant that the holes in the building would have proved that planes did not cause them and there would have been very little plane wreckage found within the building apart from those planted. The towers were therefore brought down with explosives along with building 7 because they had to be. Without bringing them down the evidence would be there for all to see. Skyscrapers have never collapsed due to fire. The towers did not collapse due to fire.

The questions arises what happened to the planes which took off and the passengers on board? I believe these were taken to a secret military base. The passengers were likely killed.

The whole purpose of the operation was a reason to wage war on the alleged global threat of terrorism. The terrorism illusion is just a con to allow the US and Britain to invade any country they wish. The outrage would and did give the US and British government an excuse to declare war on anyone harbouring terrorists. Afghanistan was the first target and then Iraq. Bin Laden was declared responsible within hours of the attack and everyone bayed for his blood. The illusion was complete and his capture was dragged out for 10 years, Bin Laden apparently always one step ahead of the rest of the world. I think Bin Laden was likely working for the CIA and was persuaded to go along with the whole thing. He was on to a winner. He gets paid beyond his dreams to be part of the plan and he is hero to muslims around the world. It was a perfect scenario for him. He is not on the run and faces no fear of capture. He lives a life of luxury and dies peacefully, a martyr in the eyes of the muslim world.

So im left with:

- no hijack
- no planes hitting the buildings
- missiles
- explosives
- fake CGI
- media participation at the highest level
- a complicit Bin Laden working for the US painted as the big bad wolf

Now im beginning to see the truth in all this it scares me. Im not a massive one for conspiracy theories as will be noted from my previous posts but im convinced the truth is not that distanced from what ive documented here. If it is true then the world we live in is more sinister than I ever thought possible.
dimaryp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-04-2012, 03:16 PM   #2
dave52
Senior Member
 
dave52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,149
Default

Welcome aboard Dimaryp...!
__________________
Dave.

www.DaveWare.co.uk
Are You Listening...?
dave52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-04-2012, 03:25 PM   #3
marky78
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 992
Default

welcome,


if you believe the above then why do you think it was a missile? would it not be easier to use explosives to make the plane hole?
marky78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-04-2012, 03:26 PM   #4
lobuk
Moderator
 
lobuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Roger That
Posts: 14,618
Default

Welcome dimaryp and thanks for sharing.
__________________
lobuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-04-2012, 03:26 PM   #5
ultimate_warlord
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Andromeda
Posts: 4,331
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dimaryp View Post
Im not really one for conspiracy theories and more often than not I think the official version of events is the truth. However I do have concerns about events like Diana, Maddy Mccann and 9/11.

Ive had doubts in my mind about 9/11 for some time now but I have only fairly recently undertaken any research in relation to what could have happened that day. Below is a brief summary of what I think happened. Please feel free to agree or disagree with any of it so that I can consider the arguments and take it on board. I am not a person who will blindly continue to believe a conspiracy if there is evidence to the contrary but 9/11 for me just does not add up on so many levels.

The first most glaring thing that strikes me and has for some time is how fake the planes hitting the towers look. It is laughable how bad it is. The footage of flight 175 entering the south tower just looks so wrong it really disturbs me. The plane just glides in like a knife through butter. No breaking up of the plane, no crushing, no explosion on impact, just a clean, smooth passage into the tower. Im pretty much convinced that the footage of the planes hitting the towers is either faked CGI footage or the footage is genuine and is of something which was actually there but was not a plane.

So now im thinking if it wasnít planes that hit the buildings what was it? To me it looks like missiles were likely to have been fired into the towers from a helicopter. I suppose this then puts me in the Ďno planersí category. As crazy as it sounds thatís the conclusion that ive come to along with quite a few others it seems. The evidence has pointed me there. I didnít want it to but it has and I see that as a credible explanation.

Also I cant believe that three aircraft of that size could be flown perfectly into collision with the towers and the pentagon. We are meant to believe that amateur pilots with only minimal experience of flying light aircraft could have controlled the planes for some considerable distance at high speed and perfectly guided the planes slap bang into the buildings. Im sorry but that is just fairy tale stuff. Never in a million years would that happen. The hijackers would have been lucky to get within a mile of the targets nevermind hitting such small targets bang on. Just think about that, if you personally had had minimal flight training on light aircraft would you have been able to take control of one of those planes mid flight, which they had no experience of flying and guided them perfectly into the towers and the pentagon with no parts of the plane sticking out. I think its actually unbelievable that those version of events could ever happen. Shanksville is just a red herring to make it look like the pilots werenít that perfect and give the illusion some balance.

So if I believe missiles were fired into the towers then the footage must have been faked and CGI used to cover up the missile strikes and the media is in on the plan or some kind of hologram has been used to cover the missiles as I believe David Shayler has commented. I donít go along with the hologram theory. I suppose anything is possible but I just cant see that.

So im going with the faked media footage using CGI theory. I think the shape of a plane has been superimposed over the top of the missiles. In terms of what happened at the pentagon I believe that a missile was used again and that is what you can see very briefly on the CCTV hitting the building.

The towers had to be brought down to cover up the lack of evidence of planes being used. To leave them standing would have meant that the holes in the building would have proved that planes did not cause them and there would have been very little plane wreckage found within the building apart from those planted. The towers were therefore brought down with explosives along with building 7 because they had to be. Without bringing them down the evidence would be there for all to see. Skyscrapers have never collapsed due to fire. The towers did not collapse due to fire.

The questions arises what happened to the planes which took off and the passengers on board? I believe these were taken to a secret military base. The passengers were likely killed.

The whole purpose of the operation was a reason to wage war on the alleged global threat of terrorism. The terrorism illusion is just a con to allow the US and Britain to invade any country they wish. The outrage would and did give the US and British government an excuse to declare war on anyone harbouring terrorists. Afghanistan was the first target and then Iraq. Bin Laden was declared responsible within hours of the attack and everyone bayed for his blood. The illusion was complete and his capture was dragged out for 10 years, Bin Laden apparently always one step ahead of the rest of the world. I think Bin Laden was likely working for the CIA and was persuaded to go along with the whole thing. He was on to a winner. He gets paid beyond his dreams to be part of the plan and he is hero to muslims around the world. It was a perfect scenario for him. He is not on the run and faces no fear of capture. He lives a life of luxury and dies peacefully, a martyr in the eyes of the muslim world.

So im left with:

- no hijack
- no planes hitting the buildings
- missiles
- explosives
- fake CGI
- media participation at the highest level
- a complicit Bin Laden working for the US painted as the big bad wolf

Now im beginning to see the truth in all this it scares me. Im not a massive one for conspiracy theories as will be noted from my previous posts but im convinced the truth is not that distanced from what ive documented here. If it is true then the world we live in is more sinister than I ever thought possible.
JOIN THE CLUB, MATE, but whatever you do...
DON`T GET SCARED.
That will make them win this game.
If we die, we die together.

ultimate_warlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2012, 03:08 AM   #6
utah
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dimaryp View Post
Im not really one for conspiracy theories and more often than not I think the official version of events is the truth. However I do have concerns about events like Diana, Maddy Mccann and 9/11.

Ive had doubts in my mind about 9/11 for some time now but I have only fairly recently undertaken any research in relation to what could have happened that day. Below is a brief summary of what I think happened. Please feel free to agree or disagree with any of it so that I can consider the arguments and take it on board. I am not a person who will blindly continue to believe a conspiracy if there is evidence to the contrary but 9/11 for me just does not add up on so many levels.

The first most glaring thing that strikes me and has for some time is how fake the planes hitting the towers look. It is laughable how bad it is. The footage of flight 175 entering the south tower just looks so wrong it really disturbs me. The plane just glides in like a knife through butter. No breaking up of the plane, no crushing, no explosion on impact, just a clean, smooth passage into the tower. Im pretty much convinced that the footage of the planes hitting the towers is either faked CGI footage or the footage is genuine and is of something which was actually there but was not a plane.

So now im thinking if it wasnít planes that hit the buildings what was it? To me it looks like missiles were likely to have been fired into the towers from a helicopter. I suppose this then puts me in the Ďno planersí category. As crazy as it sounds thatís the conclusion that ive come to along with quite a few others it seems. The evidence has pointed me there. I didnít want it to but it has and I see that as a credible explanation.

Also I cant believe that three aircraft of that size could be flown perfectly into collision with the towers and the pentagon. We are meant to believe that amateur pilots with only minimal experience of flying light aircraft could have controlled the planes for some considerable distance at high speed and perfectly guided the planes slap bang into the buildings. Im sorry but that is just fairy tale stuff. Never in a million years would that happen. The hijackers would have been lucky to get within a mile of the targets nevermind hitting such small targets bang on. Just think about that, if you personally had had minimal flight training on light aircraft would you have been able to take control of one of those planes mid flight, which they had no experience of flying and guided them perfectly into the towers and the pentagon with no parts of the plane sticking out. I think its actually unbelievable that those version of events could ever happen. Shanksville is just a red herring to make it look like the pilots werenít that perfect and give the illusion some balance.

So if I believe missiles were fired into the towers then the footage must have been faked and CGI used to cover up the missile strikes and the media is in on the plan or some kind of hologram has been used to cover the missiles as I believe David Shayler has commented. I donít go along with the hologram theory. I suppose anything is possible but I just cant see that.

So im going with the faked media footage using CGI theory. I think the shape of a plane has been superimposed over the top of the missiles. In terms of what happened at the pentagon I believe that a missile was used again and that is what you can see very briefly on the CCTV hitting the building.

The towers had to be brought down to cover up the lack of evidence of planes being used. To leave them standing would have meant that the holes in the building would have proved that planes did not cause them and there would have been very little plane wreckage found within the building apart from those planted. The towers were therefore brought down with explosives along with building 7 because they had to be. Without bringing them down the evidence would be there for all to see. Skyscrapers have never collapsed due to fire. The towers did not collapse due to fire.

The questions arises what happened to the planes which took off and the passengers on board? I believe these were taken to a secret military base. The passengers were likely killed.

The whole purpose of the operation was a reason to wage war on the alleged global threat of terrorism. The terrorism illusion is just a con to allow the US and Britain to invade any country they wish. The outrage would and did give the US and British government an excuse to declare war on anyone harbouring terrorists. Afghanistan was the first target and then Iraq. Bin Laden was declared responsible within hours of the attack and everyone bayed for his blood. The illusion was complete and his capture was dragged out for 10 years, Bin Laden apparently always one step ahead of the rest of the world. I think Bin Laden was likely working for the CIA and was persuaded to go along with the whole thing. He was on to a winner. He gets paid beyond his dreams to be part of the plan and he is hero to muslims around the world. It was a perfect scenario for him. He is not on the run and faces no fear of capture. He lives a life of luxury and dies peacefully, a martyr in the eyes of the muslim world.

So im left with:

- no hijack
- no planes hitting the buildings
- missiles
- explosives
- fake CGI
- media participation at the highest level
- a complicit Bin Laden working for the US painted as the big bad wolf

Now im beginning to see the truth in all this it scares me. Im not a massive one for conspiracy theories as will be noted from my previous posts but im convinced the truth is not that distanced from what ive documented here. If it is true then the world we live in is more sinister than I ever thought possible.
Yep, you pretty much got it. But I disagree with the missile theory. Why would they use missles at all? Very expensive, and extremely risky, and if the whole thing was CGI, what for? I just don't see why any missiles would be needed. How did you come to this conclusion?
utah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2012, 07:38 AM   #7
Dude111
Senior Member
 
Dude111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 15,475
Default

An excellent thread indeed!!!

GOOD SEEING MORE AND MORE PPL USING THIER MINDS!!!!!

Welcome to the site
Dude111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2012, 08:47 AM   #8
openwide333
Inactive
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 336
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dimaryp View Post
Im not really one for conspiracy theories and more often than not I think the official version of events is the truth. However I do have concerns about events like Diana, Maddy Mccann and 9/11.

Ive had doubts in my mind about 9/11 for some time now but I have only fairly recently undertaken any research in relation to what could have happened that day. Below is a brief summary of what I think happened. Please feel free to agree or disagree with any of it so that I can consider the arguments and take it on board. I am not a person who will blindly continue to believe a conspiracy if there is evidence to the contrary but 9/11 for me just does not add up on so many levels.

The first most glaring thing that strikes me and has for some time is how fake the planes hitting the towers look. It is laughable how bad it is. The footage of flight 175 entering the south tower just looks so wrong it really disturbs me. The plane just glides in like a knife through butter. No breaking up of the plane, no crushing, no explosion on impact, just a clean, smooth passage into the tower. Im pretty much convinced that the footage of the planes hitting the towers is either faked CGI footage or the footage is genuine and is of something which was actually there but was not a plane.

So now im thinking if it wasnít planes that hit the buildings what was it? To me it looks like missiles were likely to have been fired into the towers from a helicopter. I suppose this then puts me in the Ďno planersí category. As crazy as it sounds thatís the conclusion that ive come to along with quite a few others it seems. The evidence has pointed me there. I didnít want it to but it has and I see that as a credible explanation.

Also I cant believe that three aircraft of that size could be flown perfectly into collision with the towers and the pentagon. We are meant to believe that amateur pilots with only minimal experience of flying light aircraft could have controlled the planes for some considerable distance at high speed and perfectly guided the planes slap bang into the buildings. Im sorry but that is just fairy tale stuff. Never in a million years would that happen. The hijackers would have been lucky to get within a mile of the targets nevermind hitting such small targets bang on. Just think about that, if you personally had had minimal flight training on light aircraft would you have been able to take control of one of those planes mid flight, which they had no experience of flying and guided them perfectly into the towers and the pentagon with no parts of the plane sticking out. I think its actually unbelievable that those version of events could ever happen. Shanksville is just a red herring to make it look like the pilots werenít that perfect and give the illusion some balance.

So if I believe missiles were fired into the towers then the footage must have been faked and CGI used to cover up the missile strikes and the media is in on the plan or some kind of hologram has been used to cover the missiles as I believe David Shayler has commented. I donít go along with the hologram theory. I suppose anything is possible but I just cant see that.

So im going with the faked media footage using CGI theory. I think the shape of a plane has been superimposed over the top of the missiles. In terms of what happened at the pentagon I believe that a missile was used again and that is what you can see very briefly on the CCTV hitting the building.

The towers had to be brought down to cover up the lack of evidence of planes being used. To leave them standing would have meant that the holes in the building would have proved that planes did not cause them and there would have been very little plane wreckage found within the building apart from those planted. The towers were therefore brought down with explosives along with building 7 because they had to be. Without bringing them down the evidence would be there for all to see. Skyscrapers have never collapsed due to fire. The towers did not collapse due to fire.

The questions arises what happened to the planes which took off and the passengers on board? I believe these were taken to a secret military base. The passengers were likely killed.

The whole purpose of the operation was a reason to wage war on the alleged global threat of terrorism. The terrorism illusion is just a con to allow the US and Britain to invade any country they wish. The outrage would and did give the US and British government an excuse to declare war on anyone harbouring terrorists. Afghanistan was the first target and then Iraq. Bin Laden was declared responsible within hours of the attack and everyone bayed for his blood. The illusion was complete and his capture was dragged out for 10 years, Bin Laden apparently always one step ahead of the rest of the world. I think Bin Laden was likely working for the CIA and was persuaded to go along with the whole thing. He was on to a winner. He gets paid beyond his dreams to be part of the plan and he is hero to muslims around the world. It was a perfect scenario for him. He is not on the run and faces no fear of capture. He lives a life of luxury and dies peacefully, a martyr in the eyes of the muslim world.

So im left with:

- no hijack
- no planes hitting the buildings
- missiles
- explosives
- fake CGI
- media participation at the highest level
- a complicit Bin Laden working for the US painted as the big bad wolf

Now im beginning to see the truth in all this it scares me. Im not a massive one for conspiracy theories as will be noted from my previous posts but im convinced the truth is not that distanced from what ive documented here. If it is true then the world we live in is more sinister than I ever thought possible.
I definately believe the official line of events is very fishy but I don't follow a particulary conspiracy theory.

I find the collapse of the towers suspicious, especially building 7.

I'm not convinced that the planes weren't real, why would they use them? They could use remote controlled planes or allow willing people to carry out the hijacking of the planes and I've seen no evidence of this level of holographic technology that you speak of.

I don't think all the media companies are in on it. There tend to share and copy the same mainstream info thats fed to them and they only have to fall for it like everyone else, it would be easier and far less risky than getting them all in on it.

I heard at least one of the planes flew past a nuclear power plant, does anyone know if this is true?
openwide333 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:15 PM.